User talk:Cappka
Welcome Hi, welcome to Creepypasta Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the I Don't Remember page. Please be sure to check out all the Site Rules, as it is important to follow them. Failure to abide by them may result in your account being blocked. Read some new pastas by checking out or browse by topic by checking out the Genre Listing. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! SoPretentious (talk) 15:09, June 18, 2016 (UTC) Re: Purple Prose Hi - I went and re-read my comment in response to what you said and in hindsight found it a bit harsh. To clarify - I enjoyed your story and did not mean to imply that it was bad, just that intent does not necessarily negate a criticism. You clearly write with a good command of the language, and your prose is not intrinsically bad - it's actually well executed - I just found that it bogged down the core plot at times. So back to the point - I found this tvtropes article to offer a concise and useful description and history of the term. I think it's important to note that purple prose is not, by default, a bad thing. It can be used characterize the narrator, and can also be used to create a complex textured style of narrative. One of my favourite author's - Lovecraft - heavily relied on purple prose and he was active just after the Edwardian period. Even back then when stylized language was favoured people still noticed and criticized his writing for its ridiculous and overly pompous use of language. One of his detractors even wrote some deflammatory poems mocking his ridiculous style. We tend to look at older writing as being 'purple' by default but that's not really true - you only need to compare Shelley to Dickens to see what I mean. Dickens was surprisingly 'to the point' despite writing in the early to mid 1800's. In contrast Shelley was, at times, quite guilty of going over the top. You'll notice the link I put above shows that the term 'purple prose' is older than Christianity and dates back to the Romans - so it's not really limited by era or age. I think Shakespeare was also a fan of using this to designate a character as being particularly arrogant and pompous even if I suppose it would have to be called 'purple dialogue' instead of prose in his example. ChristianWallis (talk) 13:35, July 12, 2016 (UTC) EmpyrealInvective (talk) 17:13, July 13, 2016 (UTC) Re: Story For not meeting quality standards. There are quite a lot of punctuation, wording, and story issues here. Also it takes more than ten minutes to provide feedback, especially while keeping up with monitoring other site functions, have some patience. If you wanted me to say that it wasn't up to QS and not give a detailed feedback, you could have just read the message above and clicked the links. Punctuation: You forget to abbreviate titles. "Mr(.) Speaker, how would one come to such a preposterous idea?", "The Speaker, acknowledging Mr(.) Redford in earnest, continued his address.", "eventually disbanding following Mr(.) Redford's "No".", etc. Also there are a number of times you forget to use punctuation. ""After a brief recess, the board of electives flooded in(comma missing) hushed and dreary"", "the subtle drizzle collecting on the umbrella(')s edge as he trended carefully along the path", "the house adjourned(,) this man was a sinner", etc. Wording issues: "We've a already considered the implications in this debate", "The crowd departed their seats, each attendee filing to the centre isle (aisle, unless they're all going to an island to vote) in an orderly fashion", "The murder of this man is now legalised nation wide (nation-wide)." Would the court really be so nondescript when sanctioning someone's murder? Wouldn't they give a name to prevent confusion? Additionally you have a few sentences that really should be broken down into smaller sentences to help with story flow. "His caretaker never told him the exact condition that coursed through his skull; never told him what he did as the binds loosened in steady hands; never told him who they were as he felt a good man's essence leave in haste; never explained anything as he dragged that body away." Story issues: "The man before him stood shivering, the subtle drizzle collecting on the umbrellas edge as he trended carefully along the path. Behind him, a man coveted his target from afar" Really giving names to the people would prevent a lot of confusion and prevent the pronoun game. It would also help with the "All are guilty." ending by giving the audience something to relate to in this person. Look at this line for example: "As the man dragged his victim away" which man are you referring to? The one who was condemned to die? The man who is watching him? Really specifying and identifying would help cut back on some of the vagueness. Story issues cont.: Speaking of vagueness. You really don't explain a lot in the story. Rather than building a mysterious atmosphere like you probably intended, this just feels not well thought out. For example look at Redford's line in the opening: "Any discussion of this tradition, let alone action, question the very foundation upon which this society stands. In all respects, your excellency, please consider overhauling this proposal." This tells very little about the fact that this person is opposing someone's execution. Factor in the Speaker's response: "We've a already considered the implications in this debate: the loss of life, the possible mass hysteria, the victims, and nearly every other factor" How exactly can condoning the murder of this one man trigger mass hysteria and numerous victims (especially since he's killed after the vote passes)? Also Redford implies that this is a tradition, why are they voting on it now if is so commonplace in the past that is become a tradition and why do they expect it to have such negative results? Why exactly are they condoning the murder and not executing the man themselves? Maybe I'm unaware of some part of the tradition or some gruesome cruelty that would become commonplace if this were in effect. Story issues cont.: There's a real lack of explanation here. "As he pierced the skin, the house overruled that decision." The decision against murdering the man? What decision are they rejecting (to overrule: reject or disallow by exercising one's superior authority.) Also it seems incredibly forced that the court would randomly assign that all men are guilty of death (Even Redford after his opposition). They already weighed the outcomes of killing one man (loss of life, the possible mass hysteria, the victims), why decide to do it on a massive scale? It feels like you wanted a twist but didn't want to really explain it and make it effective. Combine that with the flowery language that seems to be attempting to cover up the real lack of driving story ("His caretaker never told him the exact condition that coursed through his skull; never told him what he did as the binds loosened in steady hands; never told him who they were as he felt a good man's essence leave in haste...") and your story gets weighed down. There're other issues, but since you've messaged me two separate times since I started writing this, I'm going to assume you would rather have the cliff notes than a detailed explanation. Your story was deleted for not meeting quality standards. Besides the numerous punctuation and wording issues, the vagueness of the story, the frequent use of flowery language, and the real lack of characterization resulted in the story being below QS. I suggest taking your next story to the writer's workshop and being more patient. Most admins take more than a day to respond so insisting that they respond within thirty minutes makes you seem entitled (especially since I didn't have to write out all this, but I did so you could possibly learn from your mistakes.) EmpyrealInvective (talk) 18:00, July 13, 2016 (UTC) :I'm sorry, but if your intention was to make the court proceedings all in the character's head, you need a lot more allusion to this as I just assumed "his mind a tangle of broken words and flawed logic" implied that he was simply an unstable man who had no connection to the court's ruling except that he knew the person was free to kill. The fact that the only named character (Redford) is seemingly a figment of the killer's imagination while the killer is not named or referenced much through-out the story (the proceedings are focused on the victim and the judgement is an open invitation to all to kill the guy rather than a sanctioning of that killer's decision to murder) doesn't really help the audience come to that conclusion. :As for flowery language detracting from a story, feel free to read over Blood Whistle. It generally detracts from a story if the audience feels the author is using larger words (sometimes improperly) to explain something that could have been easily explained without a thesaurus. Hemingway once said, "Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words?" (Faulkner implied that Hemingway's writing would never send anyone running to their dictionary.) EmpyrealInvective (talk) 18:43, July 13, 2016 (UTC) ::It's more about whether the words feel natural to the story or not. For example, I could call a haze of smoke 'insalubrious' as I picked up the word from reading a bit, but it'd still feel forced if I used it in a conversation. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 19:17, July 13, 2016 (UTC) EmpyrealInvective (talk) 04:25, July 14, 2016 (UTC) Re: You really haven't fixed much, your latest edition still had a lot of issues ignoring the abbreviation issues as I recently learned that those are actually region-specific (my bad on that), there is still a whole lot of wording and story issues present. A few minor tweaks to the story really doesn't change much. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 06:01, July 14, 2016 (UTC) :It's mainly the fact that you seem to be rushing through and have overlooked quite a lot of my previous messages. The deletion message warned against re-posting, the deletion reason pointed out quite a bit of issues (some corrected, others ignored). :"We've a (sic) already considered the implications in this debate:" do you mean that to be a speech tic like "uh" or "ah"? If so, you should really use a comma or a hyphen to indicate a pause/break in flow. :"the house adjourned(comma missing) this man was a sinner." If you mean this to be a sentence: "As he drew the blade in fierce preparation, the house adjourned this man was a sinner." then you are using adjourned incorrectly. To adjourn: "break off (a meeting, legal case, or game) with the intention of resuming it later." :""As he pierced the skin, the house overruled that decision." The decision against murdering the man? What decision are they rejecting (to overrule: reject or disallow by exercising one's superior authority.)? To overrule means to reject. To overrule that decision means that they are actually saying that it is now against the law. (Supreme Court may overrule a decision to sell booze Did you mean to say amended as they extend the singular case to all humans in general? :"As the patient passed his victim, the house committed to a new verdict:" Do you mean he walked passed him? If you mean he stabbed him and kept walking, it feels like a lot more detail is needed here to make this effective. :The story behind the killer deciding to murder someone still feels really scant and not fleshed out. It still feels fairly vague and not well explained. "Now, free, the voices instructed him on ethics: who to torture, who to maim, who to kill." This line is used before they amend their previous decision to extend to all people. Why are they advising him on who to murder when their original decision was just "The murder of this man is now legalized.". :There really isn't a lot of characterization either to the man/patient. Given that a majority of this story takes place inside their head, it seems odd not to go into their reasoning. In fact, I feel like I know Senator Redford more than the intended focus as he's given a name, ideals, and mannerisms whereas the patient just attacks a guy at the end. In fact you seem to focus more on the senators than the patient ("Chris Harley, elective for Canns, voted in favour. David Short, elective for Townsville, voted in favour...") :In the end this feels like it might be more effective if you spent more time in fleshing out the character and giving insight into them. The story basically amounts to the court passing 'justice' (deciding he's to be executed), but there isn't much reason given why or what is happening in the patient's story. This feels like a missed opportunity to get descriptive on a story that's been pretty vague/inferred up to this point. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 06:40, July 14, 2016 (UTC) ::"I don't give insight into the patients overall character or motivations is because he is insane; I'm trying to paint a picture of his own insanity." The issue is without that character or motivations, it feels like you're painting without a full spectrum of colors. Without any insight it just feels like the typical 'crazed killer kills people because they're crazy' story that is generally un-involving (which is a shame as I Don't Remember was a lot more effective at drawing the audience in. ::So when the story is in third person while being from the patient's point of view the whole time, to not really include that outside perspective in a story whose narrative is open feels odd. For example they think a lot about torture and inflicting punishment ("...instructed him on ethics: who to torture, who to maim, who to kill.") during the crime, but there isn't enough here beyond the fact that he stabbed a guy and walked by him ("As he pierced the skin ... As a dying breath left, the house voted in favour of judging all. ... As the patient passed his victim, the house committed to a new verdict:"). While I'm not saying that it needs to be gory, it comes off as anti-climactic to build up brutality and then end it in a few sentences without any real focus/description of what's occurring. ::It also feels like you want the audience to make some intuitive leaps that aren't really present. "The voices in the patient's head explained his surroundings quite well. (I get that those are the electives.) "His caretaker never told him the exact condition that coursed through his skull;" (Not sure who this is? Is this another facet of his madness? Was this a literal caretaker at the hospital he left from? If it's another facet, why is it only being introduced at the very end in a quick line? If it was an orderly of sorts that he was a patient at, it still comes off as a last minute inclusion.) EmpyrealInvective (talk) 07:51, July 14, 2016 (UTC) :::I'm pretty busy at the moment so I suggest uploading it to the writer's workshop if you're looking for feedback. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 17:05, July 14, 2016 (UTC) Blocked You have been blocked for one day for continuing to reupload your deleted story without approval after being warned multiple times by administrators. You must go through Deletion Appeal if you want to reupload your story. | creepypasta.wikia.com | Underscorre talk - - | [[User:Underscorre|'Under']][[User talk:Underscorre|'Scorre']] }} 11:42, July 15, 2016 (UTC) Re: I'll let Empy decide since he's been working with you on it, but I will tell you that almost no one is going to understand what's going on in that story. I've read it several times and read your explanations, and I still get absolutely no visual and no point whatsoever. I realize there likely is a point, but what I'm saying is it's terribly unclear. You really need to consider your potential readers more than you have in this instance. And never jump to the "they just don't get it" way of thinking, because that's a guaranteed way to become stagnant. If you have to explain something you've written so it makes sense to the reader, then you need to go back to the drawing board, as they say. On a positive note, I see a lot of potential in your prose. Very nicely written. Good luck. Jay Ten (talk) 13:03, July 16, 2016 (UTC) :Ok, I finally got it. I still stand by my view that it will confuse a lot of people, so I'm going to suggest you put it in the workshop and get some feedback first. As of right now, it's still being denied. Let's see what some others think of it without you giving any explanation. I'm more than willing to change my mind. :Jay Ten (talk) 14:07, July 16, 2016 (UTC) re: story Done and done. --Mikemacdee (talk) 11:11, July 17, 2016 (UTC) Story deletion Your story has been deleted because it doesn't meet the wiki's quality standards. If you feel that it did meet the standards, please state your case on Deletion Appeal. Make sure you follow the instructions to the letter there, or your appeal will be automatically denied. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO REUPLOAD YOUR PASTA. If you upload it again, you'll receive a 1-day ban from editing, as per the rules. Read the Deletion FAQ and our Style Guide for Writing for details on the 'what' and 'why' of the deletions we make. Read this guide and these blog posts for further details on how you can improve your story/stories to make them meet our quality standards. For additional help, submit your story to the Writer's Workshop for feedback. LOLSKELETONS (talk) 07:20, July 19, 2016 (UTC) :Basically. I couldn't even tell what was supposed to be going on. LOLSKELETONS (talk) 07:45, July 19, 2016 (UTC)